Thousands of people have called on Cheshire West and Chester Council to think again when it comes to plans to reduce the 17 refuge places available in the borough for victims of domestic violence.

Karen Shore, a Labour candidate for Whitby ward in the 2015 elections, handed in a 2,000-strong petition to the authority asking the Conservative-led authority to reconsider the plans.

The issue arises from a borough council decision to close the three refuges across Cheshire West and Chester, including the haven for victims in Ellesmere Port and to replace them with a single centre, described as a hub.

There would also be separate accommodation elsewhere as part of the service which would avoid the need for different families to share kitchens and bathrooms as many have to at present.

Families would receive intervention work at an earlier stage and a behaviour change programme would be targeted at the perpetrators of domestic abuse.

For the borough, executive member for commissioning Cllr Lynda Jones (Con) has given an assurance the current arrangements will continue until the new service is in place.

Presenting the petition to the council’s Executive, Ms Shore, a Labour candidate for Whitby ward in the 2015 elections, argued passionately for the retention of the existing refuges in the town and in Northwich and to end a proposal to ‘cap’ access for women and children from other areas seeking refuge in Cheshire West.

The petition, organised by Labour Party members and councillors and signed by local people, will now trigger a full debate at the next available meeting of the full council.

“We think the message should be that we are a caring place that accepts women seeking refuge, no matter where they are from,” she argued.

“We cannot stand by and watch the council shut the door on domestic violence to save a small amount of money.

“The volume of signatures on the petition speaks for itself.

“Nobody agrees with this idea, because it is the wrong decision and the wrong choice.

“There should not be borders for domestic violence support.”

Referring to the council’s claim the changes would modernise the service by providing high quality facilities, improved support, better accommodation and provision for a much wider range of families she insisted: “The overall reduction will reduce the size and scope of the service provided by the local authority putting it in further peril and creating an over reliance on charities to fill the void.

“Reducing the capacity will mean a reduced service. We consider this to be irresponsible particularly where children are involved and there are obviously safeguarding issues.

“The council must think again and maintain the current provision of 17 places across the borough for victims of domestic abuse.

“What these proposals amount to is a cut to a much needed service which is already overburdened.”

She pointed out the closure of the refuge in Ellesmere Port would mean there would be no provision for victims of domestic abuse in the town.

Victims would have to move to the nearest refuge in Chester where they would be ‘far removed from the much needed support network of family and friends at such a critical time in their lives when crisis and vulnerability features strongly’.

She also believed the cap on the use of the service from those outside the borough would be harmful to victims fleeing from violent partners often across local authority boundaries in search of sanctuary or safe havens.

“Incidents of domestic abuse are on the increase and the last thing this authority should be doing is shutting the door on domestic violence, particularly before any evaluation of the new system has been undertaken,” Ms Shore suggested.

“We implore you to reconsider the impact of these cuts on the victims and rethink the proposals,” she told councillors.

Move part of 'joined up' response

The council argues the move reflects a wider change in the way it wants domestic abuse services to be provided.

Executive member for commissioning, Cllr Lynda Jones (Con), explained it is an integral part of an initiative approved by the Government a key feature of which is a ‘joined up’ response for victims of domestic abuse.

“The commissioning of a new, modernised refuge service formed a key component of that business case.

“Also this is part of the council’s wider agenda to commission more cost effective, modernised and high quality services, with good contract management and quality assurance, but with the focus on the needs of the clients and their outcomes,” she believes.

Cllr Jones points out the present arrangements are part of a number of housing related services inherited by the new council which have been successfully reviewed, modernised and improved to secure £3m of savings to the taxpayer whilst maintaining service levels.

There are improved quality and outcomes for residents who often are the most vulnerable in the community.

The proposals have been subject to ‘extensive consultation’, the council says.

Cllr Brenda Dowding (Con, Parkgate), the council’s executive member for adult health and social care, has responded to criticism that the average time a family would be housed in the new hub would be 12 weeks, a six week reduction on the present figure.

The objective, she says, is for victims to return as quickly as possible to a normal family life.

“I have had a lot of contact with domestic abuse issues through my day job and I have never met anybody who wants to be in a refuge,” she commented.

“People want to have their own home, they want the things that we want, so trying to reduce the amount of time that people stay in refuges is a positive thing.”

Referring to the petition, Little Neston and Burton ward borough councillor Louise Gittins (Lab) said: “This shows the strength of feeling in the community about keeping our refuge doors open to anyone fleeing domestic abuse, regardless of where they come from.

“I am looking forward to debating this crucial issue at full council.”

The matter has previously been called in for scrutiny by Labour councillors who believed there were a wide range of issues which called the decision into question when numbers seeking refuge, including those from outside the borough, were increasing.

A vote saw the committee declining to offer advice to the Executive but a call was made for regular reports on the proposed new service with prior scrutiny of key high risk decisions involving safeguarding.